Continuous soil carbon storage of old permanent pastures in Amazonia

Animal board invited review: OneARK: Strengthening the links between animal production science and animal ecology

Wild and farmed animals are key elements of natural and managed ecosystems that deliver functions such as pollination, pest control and nutrient cycling within the broader roles they play in contributing to biodiversity and to every category of ecosystem services. They are subjected to global changes with a profound impact on the natural range and viability of animal species, the emergence and spatial distribution of pathogens, land use, ecosystem services and farming sustainability. We urgently need to improve our understanding of how animal populations can respond adaptively and therefore sustainably to these new selective pressures. In this context, we explored the common points between animal production science and animal ecology to identify promising avenues of synergy between communities through the transfer of concepts and/or methodologies, focusing on seven concepts that link both disciplines. Animal adaptability, animal diversity (both within and between species), selection, animal management, animal monitoring, agroecology and viability risks were identified as key concepts that should serve the cross-fertilization of both fields to improve ecosystem resilience and farming sustainability. The need for breaking down interdisciplinary barriers is illustrated by two representative examples: i) the circulation and reassortment of pathogens between wild and domestic animals and ii) the role of animals in nutrient cycles, i.e. recycling nitrogen, phosphorus and carbon through, for example, contribution to soil fertility and carbon sequestration. Our synthesis identifies the need for knowledge integration techniques supported by programmes and policy tools that reverse the fragmentation of animal research toward a unification into a single Animal Research Kinship, OneARK, which sets new objectives for future science policy. At the interface of animal ecology and animal production science, our article promotes an effective application of the agroecology concept to animals and the use of functional diversity to increase resilience in both wild and farmed systems. It also promotes the use of novel monitoring technologies to quantify animal welfare and factors affecting fitness. These measures are needed to evaluate viability risk, predict and potentially increase animal adaptability and improve the management of wild and farmed systems, thereby responding to an increasing demand of society for the development of a sustainable management of systems.

Characterising the biophysical, economic and social impacts of soil carbon sequestration as a greenhouse gas removal technology

To limit warming to well below 2°C, most scenario projections rely on greenhouse gas removal technologies (GGRTs); one such GGRT uses soil carbon sequestration (SCS) in agricultural land. In addition to their role in mitigating climate change, SCS practices play a role in delivering agroecosystem resilience, climate change adaptability and food security. Environmental heterogeneity and differences in agricultural practices challenge the practical implementation of SCS, and our analysis addresses the associated knowledge gap. Previous assessments have focused on global potentials, but there is a need among policymakers to operationalise SCS. Here, we assess a range of practices already proposed to deliver SCS, and distil these into a subset of specific measures. We provide a multidisciplinary summary of the barriers and potential incentives towards practical implementation of these measures. First, we identify specific practices with potential for both a positive impact on SCS at farm level and an uptake rate compatible with global impact. These focus on: (a) optimising crop primary productivity (e.g. nutrient optimisation, pH management, irrigation); (b) reducing soil disturbance and managing soil physical properties (e.g. improved rotations, minimum till); (c) minimising deliberate removal of C or lateral transport via erosion processes (e.g. support measures, bare fallow reduction); (d) addition of C produced outside the system (e.g. organic manure amendments, biochar addition); (e) provision of additional C inputs within the cropping system (e.g. agroforestry, cover cropping). We then consider economic and non-cost barriers and incentives for land managers implementing these measures, along with the potential externalised impacts of implementation. This offers a framework and reference point for holistic assessment of the impacts of SCS. Finally, we summarise and discuss the ability of extant scientific approaches to quantify the technical potential and externalities of SCS measures, and the barriers and incentives to their implementation in global agricultural systems.

How to measure, report and verify soil carbon change to realize the potential of soil carbon sequestration for atmospheric greenhouse gas removal

There is growing international interest in better managing soils to increase soil organic carbon (SOC) content to contribute to climate change mitigation, to enhance resilience to climate change and to underpin food security, through initiatives such as international '4p1000' initiative and the FAO's Global assessment of SOC sequestration potential (GSOCseq) programme. Since SOC content of soils cannot be easily measured, a key barrier to implementing programmes to increase SOC at large scale, is the need for credible and reliable measurement/monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) platforms, both for national reporting and for emissions trading. Without such platforms, investments could be considered risky. In this paper, we review methods and challenges of measuring SOC change directly in soils, before examining some recent novel developments that show promise for quantifying SOC. We describe how repeat soil surveys are used to estimate changes in SOC over time, and how long-term experiments and space-for-time substitution sites can serve as sources of knowledge and can be used to test models, and as potential benchmark sites in global frameworks to estimate SOC change. We briefly consider models that can be used to simulate and project change in SOC and examine the MRV platforms for SOC change already in use in various countries/regions. In the final section, we bring together the various components described in this review, to describe a new vision for a global framework for MRV of SOC change, to support national and international initiatives seeking to effect change in the way we manage our soils.

Reassessing the role of grazing lands in carbon-balance estimations: Meta-analysis and review

Assuming a steady state between carbon (C) gains and losses, greenhouse gases (GHG) inventories that follow a widely used simplified procedure (IPCC Tier 1) tend to underestimate the capacity of soils in grazing-land to sequester C. In this study we compared the C balance reported by (i) national inventories that followed the simplified method (Tier 1) of IPCC (1996/2006), with (ii) an alternative estimation derived from the meta-analysis of science-based, peer-reviewed data. We used the global databases (i) EDGAR 4.2 to get data on GHG emissions due to land conversion and livestock/crop production, and (ii) HYDE 3.1 to obtain historical series on land-use/land cover (LULC). In terms of sequestration, our study was focused on C storage as soil organic carbon (SOC) in rural lands of four countries (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay) within the so-called MERCOSUR region. Supported by a large body of scientific evidence, we hypothesized that C gains and losses in grazing lands are not in balance and that C gains tend to be higher than C losses at low livestock densities. We applied a two-way procedure to test our hypothesis: i) a theoretical one based on the annual conversion of belowground biomass into SOC; and ii) an empirical one supported by peer-reviewed data on SOC sequestration. Average figures from both methods were combined with LULC data to reassess the net C balance in the study countries. Our results show that grazing lands generate C surpluses that could not only offset rural emissions, but could also partially or totally offset the emissions of non-rural sectors. The potential of grazing lands to sequester and store soil C should be reconsidered in order to improve assessments in future GHG inventory reports.